Is Possession of Parephernalia a Controlled Substance Violation
My question involves criminal law for the state of: Missouri
In college, 9 years ago I was convicted with misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia (smoking weed in pipe) in municipal court, paid a fine and got on with my life. I have always admitted to this offense for various background checks, when they ask for any and all CHARGES, but it never shows up. But I have a unique case here. I am in the health professions field and am applying for a DEA number, in their application it states:
Q: Has the applicant ever pled guilty, nolo contendere, no contest or otherwise ever been convicted of any violation of any state or federal law relating to controlled substances?
Here is my issue, 1) I pled guilty to possession of paraphernalia, not possession/manufacture,distribution of controlled substances 2) I was charged in municipal court, hence paid a fine in municipal court and was never charged at a state or federal level.
So I feel that I can state no in this case....anyone else have an opinion?
Re: Is Possession of Parephernalia a Controlled Substance Violation
Quote:
Quoting
frikarika
Q: Has the applicant ever pled guilty, nolo contendere, no contest or otherwise ever been convicted of any violation of any state or federal law relating to controlled substances?
Here is my issue, 1) I pled guilty to possession of paraphernalia, not possession/manufacture,distribution of controlled substances 2) I was charged in municipal court, hence paid a fine in municipal court and was never charged at a state or federal level.
Note that the question does not ask only if you were convicted of "possession/manufacture, distribution of controlled substances." It asks about any conviction for anything "relating to controlled substances!" I feel pretty confident that the DEA considers possession of drug paraphernalia as being an offense that relates to controlled substances.
Just because you case was adjudicated in municipal court means nothing in trying to split hairs here. In municipal court, you were convicted of a state law - which is what the question actually asks.
Quote:
Quoting
frikarika
So I feel that I can state no in this case....anyone else have an opinion?
Sure, you can state "no in this case"...but you would be lying. Maybe past employment background checks didn't reveal this. But, you can bet your butt that the DEA does have access to that record. If they catch you lying (and I am pretty damn confident they will!), there is no question that they will deny your request.
If you tell the truth, they may deny your request. But, considering this is a minor offense, was 9 years ago, and you have had no further offenses (I'm assuming on that one - you don't actually say), I'm thinking they will let it slide.